VILLEGAS
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to reverse the denial of Social Security benefits and remand for further administrative proceedings.
The Commissioner moved to reverse the denial of Social Security benefits and remand the case for further administrative proceedings, and the Plaintiff…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 42 U.S.C. § 405(G) Sentence Four Remand cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant Acting Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) moves, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for this action to be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner “for further administrative proceedings, including additional consideration of the evidence, offering Plaintiff the opportunity for a new hearing, obtaining supplemental vocational expert testimony if necessary, and issuing a new decision.” (Motion, Dkt. 13.) Plaintiff does not object to the Motion. (Id.) Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the court has the “power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). When a case is remanded under sentence four of § 405(g), the district court’s jurisdiction over the case is terminated. Jackson v. Chater, 99 F. 3d 1086, 1095 (11th Cir. 1996); Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617, 625 (1990) (finding that a district court’s order remanding under sentence four of § 405(g) “terminated the civil action challenging the Secretary’s final determination that respondent was not entitled to benefits”). “Immediate entry of judgment (as opposed to entry of judgment after postremand agency proceedings have been completed and their results filed with the court) is in fact the principal feature that distinguishes a sentence-four remand from a sentence-six remand.” Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 297 (1993). A remand under sentence four of § 405(g) “is based upon a determination that the Commissioner erred in some respect in reaching the decision to deny benefits.” Jackson, 99 F. 3d at 1095. Here, the Commissioner concedes error by requesting a reversal of the Commissioner’s decision. Accordingly: 1. The Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with
Remand (Dkt. 13) is GRANTED. 2. The Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s application for Social Security benefits is REVERSED. 3. The case is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings
consistent with the Motion (Dkt. 13) and herein. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor, terminate all other pending motions, and close this case. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on June 30, 2023.
JUEIE $. SNEED
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617 (U.S. 1990)
- Jackson v. Chater, 99 F.3d 1086 (11th Cir. 1996)